Notices by Isaac Ji Kuo (isaackuo@spacey.space), page 2

@jzillw @cstross Oh yeah, I forgot about that! Is that still a thing? People buying/selling MMO items with "IRL" money?

@cstross I mean ... video game bots have been a thing for ... a long time. Just missing a monetization angle so far.

@tarheel @mekkaokereke I'm really sick of people accusing Democrats of brinksmanship when it's the Republican Party's fault that the other candidates are so dire.

We have a democratic primary process. Push for more progressive candidates during that process, or maybe cross over to try and make the Republican candidates less awful. If you don't have the votes, it's fine to voice disappointment.

But don't aim grievances at the Democratic Party when it's the Republican Party actually responsible.

@georgetakei

This is a Batman villain origin story.

@VikingChieftain @joesticker

Airborne operations were always something only used in special circumstances, so I really don't think we can say much of anything about its future.

In particular, Russia does not have to deal with a 100 mile wide strait in between itself and Ukraine. In those circumstances, it may be impossible to assault beaches laden with mines and defenders.

Paratroopers might be the only way to get past those defenses.

1/2

@VikingChieftain @joesticker

I think the Eurocopter X3 (and Airbus RACER) is a more promising configuration. It's like a conventional helicopter, but with two props to the sides rather than one tail rotor. In hover mode, one of the props thrusts in reverse so the pair act like a tail rotor. But in forward flight they both thrust forward, for superior efficiency and speed.

Compared to tilt-rotors, the X3 configuration is almost as fast and greatly superior in other aspects.

1/2

@VikingChieftain @joesticker

For example, the Eurocopter X3 configuration is more compact, able to land and launch in tighter spaces even than the equivalent tail rotor helo.

It's also no taller than a normal helo, which is a problem for counter-rotating props.

It has fewer moving parts so it's almost the same maintenance as a normal helo.

The winglets are never blocked by tilt-rotors, so they can mount missiles, rockets, and guns.

But still, it's not stealthy either.

2/2

@VikingChieftain @joesticker

The technology wasn't ready for the Army competition, and anyway neither of the (USA) based competitors had experience with it yet.

However, the basic technology is easy for any existing conventional helicopter company to adapt. The side props are really just like tail rotors, just with the shafts going out to the sides rather than to the rear.

The X3 itself was not an optimized design, but rather a modification of their Dauphin helo.

@VikingChieftain @joesticker

Still, I wouldn't hold my breath on seeing an X3 configuration troop helo. The big problem is ... where's the buyers? The US Army just closed out its competition and other than the US Army, who is looking to buy a bunch of high performance military troop helos?

Uhh ... no one? So that's why RACER is a civilian chopper.

Maybe a Dauphin based X3 type helo could be useful for some navies, but the "problem" is that the Dauphins they have are pretty good already.

@graydon @dymaxion @wonka @dr2chase @cstross

How do you know it's not a quadcopter? A quadcopter is extremely simple and cheap. The monospinner is even simpler and cheaper, but it's much slower and less maneuverable.

There are a lot of cheap RC toy drones, including drones with only two props and motors. But these aren't maneuverable enough to attack a target. The quadcopter seems to be the cheapest option that's also maneuverable enough to be used as a guided weapon.

@dymaxion @wonka @graydon @dr2chase @cstross

There's this vision that many are fascinated by, of locust swarms of drones sweeping the enemy off the battlefield.

I can understand the appeal to Raytheons and Raytheon wannabes. Selling millions of expensive drones to the US military sounds like a pretty sweet way to rake in megabucks, right?

But I'm more puzzled by how much this idea dazzles ordinary folks. Without full autonomy, massive drone swarms are a C3 non-starter. With it ... ehh ...

@graydon @dymaxion @wonka @dr2chase @cstross

I don't really know precisely what you mean by an "artificial biting insect", but Ukraine is already using pretty much the least expensive FPV drones practical. If you want something smaller, it'll be more expensive and have much less range and endurance.

@dymaxion @wonka @graydon @dr2chase @cstross

Yeah, there's definitely limitations. It's like using artillery laid mines, although these could probably be reused so that alters the logistical calculations.

I'm just pointing out that it IS possible to employ fully autonomous killbots, in a manner that is already familiar to military users, even without IFF systems.

@dymaxion @wonka @graydon @dr2chase @cstross

Yeah, I didn't want to get into the legal and ethical considerations, since there are practical reasons to consider that I felt like diving into.

Now, the thing is ... we don't have to just speculate on autonomous munition fratricide machines. We've had them for some time in the forms of mines and homing torpedoes. And these are still relevant as the heavy use in Ukraine shows.

Basically, it's about defining a kill box. Mines are, of course

1/2

@dymaxion @wonka @graydon @dr2chase @cstross

passively limited to an initially set kill box.

Homing torpedoes, in contrast, need navigation capabilities to be able to use a kill box. But the idea is quintessentially the same as a mine field - the torpedo will try to kill anything it finds in the kill box (possibly with additional sensor profile parameters), but it will NOT try to kill something outside the kill box.

This system isn't perfect, but it's a starting point.

2/2

@graydon @cstross

Yeah, we don't know where measure/countermeasure is going with drones, yet. The article mentions body armor, but as you note there are other possibilities.

Jammers have some inherent limitations - they're completely ineffective against wire guidance, which is already in use, and wire guidance could be enhanced with towed kites and laser comms (the kites provide altitude for direct line of sight at long range).

I think hard kill air defense has more potential 1/2

@vkc

I still haven't tried out Windows 11, but I still have leftover Windows 10 Pro licenses (thanks to an MSDN account) so I install Windows 10 Pro when I need Windows.

Am I missing something? I mean, Windows compatible software seems to run just fine on Windows 10, and the install/setup process for Win10 Pro seems ... I dunno, I'm okay with it (I don't install Windows very often).

Am I just being a backwards old fogey, like those of us who stuck with Win98SE way past its prime?

@floatybirb @nyrath

Well, I've looked at various moons looking for good resources to utilize, and the more you look at them the more different they look!

For example, Iapetus is the ONLY moon out there which combines a near pure ice _surface_ with a slow rotation rate (suitable for ice prism solar concentrators).

And even just the orbital positions and gravity levels have a huge impact on utility.

Terrain is also extremely different - compare Hyperion with Mimas.

@nyrath

Bear in mind that the delta-v requirements for getting around the Jupiter or Saturn systems can be pretty annoying - the large moons don't give much Oberth Effect bonus, but still have enough gravity to make launching and landing a pain. And with the exception of Titan, no option to aerobrake or aerocapture.

Limited solar power makes solar electric more sluggish, of course.

@cstross

I once programmed a UI using NeWS (basically postscript for interactive displays rather than print). No parenthesis to match up. Just a stack you mentally kept track of with your human brain. ... The pain ... the pain ...